[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

FSFS performance on NAS/NFS

From: Justin Johnson <justinjohnson_at_gmail.com>
Date: 2007-03-07 23:29:49 CET

I recently read the following statement on the dev list and wanted to
get some feedback.

"For those people who are using a NAS to store the repository, FSFS
really really really sucks."

The rest of that thread describes proposals on how to improve its performance.

In a conversation on the phone with CollabNet recently we were told
there should be no problem using FSFS repositories on NAS/NFS. The
comment above makes me think that isn't a good idea now. I know
CollabNet uses Berkeley and NAS for their repositories. Perhaps this
is one of the reasons why they aren't using FSFS.

Can anyone give any feedback on the above comment and make a
recommendation? We already are setting up hardware with NAS/NFS for
storage based on CollabNet's recommendation, so if it would be better
to go with Berkeley I'd like to know soon.


To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Mar 7 23:31:17 2007

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Users mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.